Anticipating the Mepa (Malta Environment and Planning Authority) hearing to be held in Malta tomorrow regarding the proposed 35 villas plus a commercial tourist centre at Ramla Bay, Xaghra local council met
yesterday afternoon to review the application and repeat their objection of last year that the proposal was – and still is – unacceptable.
The application proposes development PA 07902/05 for the construction of 35 villas and pools, apartments and local shops with underlying garages in the Calypso Cave area. If such a development is approved, it will cause irreparable damage to the area and will be in violation of several Mepa planning policies that legally safeguard such an environment.
Roman ruins, archeological sites and unique sand dunes that support an indigenous eco-system not found elsewhere, will be destroyed. The area is so sensitive that it is currently listed as a protected area under a UNESCO project and is also a candidate for Natura 2000 status, the local council said.
Not only is the natural beauty of the area protected but the old Ulysses Lodge covers part of the site of an old Roman villa, about which Fr Charles Cini has written extensively in an attempt to get the government to excavate and preserve it. It is accepted that an old Roman Road might be buried in the area and yet approval for the development has apparently not been sought from the Museums Department, the council added.
The proposed development will violate Policy RCO 4 and Policies Ben1 and Ben2 because it will adversely affect the scenic value of the area, since it will visually dominate and disrupt its surroundings due to its mass and location and also affect existing trees and shrubs, the council added.
The development being proposed will occupy a larger area than the structures currently on the site. Wistfully, Xaghra residents had hoped that the structure known as the Ulysses Lodge that is built over the old Roman villa area, would someday be demolished, never to be replaced.
Moreover, this proposed construction would quite probably breach environment legislation, particularly the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, said the council.
Finally, this area, which is outside the development zone, has not been the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), the council concluded.